User avatar
bjfagan
General of the Army
Posts: 628
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 11:03 pm
Location: Los Angeles, USA

Re: *General Player to Player Comments

Wed Apr 26, 2017 11:35 pm

Vezina wrote:My orders for Early January, 1867 were not processed with the turn. Was there an issue?


Phil processed the turn so not sure what happened. He said he will be away on a trip for a few days and asked that I not process the turn since there are different wars going on and he would input the orders for those countries. At some point they will have to go AI since we don't have players for them.

User avatar
PhilThib
Posts: 13308
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:21 pm
Location: Meylan (France)

Re: *General Player to Player Comments

Sat Apr 29, 2017 9:19 am

Orders were processed for January and they included everything I could find on dropbox. FRA.ord file was there (same for early January) and duly included. As far as I recall, missing orders where those of the - too numerous - absent Major Powers players.

I also entered a "no order but no AI" order file for the Russian player (in other word just clicking save and doing nothing) to avoid he gets an undesired stupid peace with Persia.

Regarding that last point, will cease to enter missing RUS orders as of now, so the country will revert to AI soon.

For the sake of the game it would be great that some players take up the mantle of the absent powers, as it seems general war is looming following the French-provoked crisis over Gabon and its declaration of war on to Prussia.

User avatar
Vezina
Lieutenant
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:27 pm

Re: *General Player to Player Comments

Sun May 07, 2017 7:43 am

Alright, I am going to go ahead and call "Shenanigans" at this point. What is happening in the current political/military situation in Europe is in direct violation of the game's house rules. Countries that are controlled by the same player are not supposed to be played in coordination.

At current, I am staring at Prussian, Bavarian, Swedish, Spanish, and Austrian armies on the borders of France; all of which are controlled by Phillippe (no offense meant, but this is a fact verified by Dropbox.) Furthermore, Dutch and Belgian navies (also controlled by Phillippe) have been stationed off of French coastline for months, which is a convenient method to observe my coastal defenses.

I am not against fighting certain countries; in fact, I welcome it. However, the entirety of Europe outside of the UK, France, Russia, and Italy are controlled by the same player and being coordinated as one coalition. If we need to put the game on hiatus, then that should be considered; but I cannot keep playing knowing that over half a dozen nations are being played as one.

User avatar
PhilThib
Posts: 13308
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:21 pm
Location: Meylan (France)

Re: *General Player to Player Comments

Mon May 08, 2017 9:08 am

100% in agreement. I have claimed for weeks to gather more players in the game, to no avail.
And the IA can't cope with situations like these.

I have been running all nations that are important in the game (including those by players who do not / cannot put their orders on time, e.g. Russia) on regular basis and based on what I would do IF, as a player, I was in charge of said nation (in other words the nation's best interest). When France provoked a crisis about Gabon without any previous diplomatic exchanges with Prussia (ex-Prussian player confirmed that), I just played it safely till France acted (solving the crisis peacefully or going forward in the war) and took no action but defensive for the Prussian, so that a player can safely step in at any time.

As I mentioned to Brian, my sole nation, as player, is Japan.

IMHO, till we get players for at least Germany, Austria and Spain, the game cannot continue. Italy and Ottomans are also opened (run in their best interest till now), as well as Belgium and Holland (both being slightly less interesting I believe)

I recommend ceasing play till new players are being recruited. I suggested to get to TWC for that

My 2 cents

User avatar
PhilThib
Posts: 13308
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:21 pm
Location: Meylan (France)

Re: *General Player to Player Comments

Mon May 08, 2017 10:17 am

Note: totally unrelated but important, the Suez Canal does not work properly.

I checked the game events, looks like a major fix for Suez proper working is missing (at the moment, no one can use it). I have prepared an event fix for that, using one that seems to work with the 1880 modded campaign and will run it when the game resumes. :indien:

This said, sometimes even the fix via event may not work (I have seen it in previous PBEM games). If this happen, there is a potential hack that can be done manually by all players via changing the RGN files by copy-pasting alterred ones in their place (which kinda creates the canal, but that would create it even if it is not build if the rgn files are not reverted, so that's something that can only be used as emergency measure in an ongoing game)

User avatar
bjfagan
General of the Army
Posts: 628
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 11:03 pm
Location: Los Angeles, USA

Re: *General Player to Player Comments

Mon May 08, 2017 8:00 pm

We have advertised for new players but no one has stepped up. While the AI isnot thebest, I have no problem with letting those major powers switch over to AI. If Vezina, Nemethand, and CitizenX want to pause we can or continue with those countries going under AI control.

User avatar
Citizen X
General of the Army
Posts: 609
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:34 pm

Re: *General Player to Player Comments

Mon May 08, 2017 11:33 pm

We should at least try for new players. If none currently comes, I could run another one besides US in "defensive" mode.

Anybody has email of former players?

Return to “PON Conflict in Europe - Redux”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest